Unfortunately you are correct regarding corbyn. Due to an inept Tory party, jezza will be the next prime minister, that would be a disaster for this country. But under a democratic system I will have to accept that scenario.
Unlike some of the political class in this country, who are determined to overturn the democratic vote of leaving the European Union.

You make an interesting point "under a democratic system I will have to accept that scenario"

It is a shame that those who lost the vote cannot put that behind and contribute positively to achieving the best result for the country. There appears to be some vanity that suggests if they belly-ache enough they will get their way.

The border in Ireland should not be an issue - freight is moved across borders all over the world with electronic customs clearance and without the need for permanent border patrols.

Using your bench mark on democracy and accepting democratic decisions in Parliament, why is it that anyone feels the need to bring up the Iraq war, something voted on by our esteemed MP's.

Surely, on an open forum, we SHOULD be discussing what may be right, or wrong, with the events of the day.
Ultimately, it would be one hell of a risk for Parliament not to uphold the will of the people.

However, as negotiations move along, it's certainly worth Parliament having to ratify a deal prior to it's implementation and if the result is so far removed from the idea that was "sold", it may also be right to go to the electorate, either in a General Election of a second referendum.

With how things are beginning to play out and with May hinting at continued payments to the EU and concessions towards the European Parliament, it could well be the "vote leave" side that aren't happy with the deal.

Oh, the irony.

Another interesting trope developed by Leavers - that we need to 'get behind' Brexit and 'make a success of it.' What does that look like exactly? And if I (and the increasing numbers of people who think it's economic suicide) suddenly start to send out positive Brexit vibes, will that be enough to fend off the inevitable decline in our economic outlook? If enough people start to believe that you actually *can* have your cake and eat it, will that make it true?

Brexitiers are a bit like the pyramid sales "experts" of the 90's.
Always telling people that things were "brilliant" or "great", unfortunately, they all had to get proper jobs in the end, although, like now, there are just a few, at the top of the pile, who did quite well out of the dodgy dealings.
But, it was never any good for the masses, who were just a little worse off at the end.

As hypothetical & pointless as it is, if you're trying to tell me the Tories wouldn't have done the same thing, you really are deluding yourself.



Just because I'm selective on who I'm prepared to listen to, I don't deserve the time of day!

I don't base my views purely on pundits, I just choose not to listen to the Tory puppet.

So was I incorrect when I stated both sides of the Tory divide seem fairly happy with May's stance, which seems a tad strange don't you think, or am I too contemptible to deserve a response?

Indeed.
The Yanks took us to war and unfortunately, if the same scenario were to come around in future, we would follow them again, it's the price to pay for being their puppet and outside the EU, we will need them as an ally more than ever.
Blair was doing precisely what Bush wanted, nothing more, nothing less and yes, the Tories would have done the same.
What would happen with Corbyn in charge, who knows but, even he may fall into line, unless we find a new super power as our "best mate".

And God, apparently.

So, in or out of the EU, we follow the Yanks into war.

Hypothetical whataboutery will never change the fact Blair and Labour took us into that war. Blame diversion simply does not work in this case.


Selective = agenda bias and blinkered input. If you publicly pass judgement on someone but gleefully admit you can't haven't even listened to them, your views can be happily dismissed. I listen to Comrade Cob and others I disagree with simply to understand all sides.

Except Diane Abbott.




Actually, I have no idea what Soubry or JRM said on the speech, given those are the names you mentioned. I suspect Soubry whinged and trotted out her usual soundbites and JRM probably complained that we need a harder line. And they're still more united than Labour.



Nevertheless, it's the same wide spectrum of views we've been hearing from politicians and the press across the board since the referendum - most of which are largely irrelevant unless they're part of the team negotiating with the EU.

On a forum like this yes why not

As for the Iraq war I am unsure as why this has raised its ugly head - shameful events that is best viewed as the monumental error it was.

What I find hard to understand is that given 80% of all MPs don't seem to want nor did want Brexit how it was they failed to convince the electorate that Brexit was such a bad idea? The remain side planted plenty of doomsday scenarios that will never come to pass. Perhaps the remainers over egged the downside more than the leavers pushed the upsides to such an extent that normal voters simply didn't believe them.

The EU have shown their true colours in the negotiations is this really a bunch of individuals that you want to control your future?

Not too sure what you mean by this ?
If you mean that they are negotiating hard and making it difficult for the UK to leave, surely this is exactly what they should be doing to protect/help the EU27.
They would be failing in their duties IF they made it easy for the UK to leave, after all, it was not their decision.

"Divorce" has been used quite frequently to describe us leaving and on the basis that "they" haven't done anything wrong, they should be taking "us" for all we have.
Remember, we are the ones walking out so," they get to keep the house" and they would be more than happy for us to stay.

It would be pure lunacy on their part to make it easy.
Perhaps they are better at negotiating that we are, they certainly seem to have the deck stacked in their favour. Mind you, apart from the blind optimists, anyone could see this is how it would be.

No body is saying it should be easy - but what you don't want to do is burn your bridges i.e. a deal is only a good deal if it works for both parties. What you can't do is say we want all the money and you give all the concessions, well you can but its not credible.

I disagree they hold all the aces - we hold the key one - we could just walk away and they have nothing especially no cash which is the want they really want.

Our issue is we are divided so easy to negotiate against - we have weak leadership - send in some senior commercial people guarantee the deal will look a lot different.

Quote ="Sal Paradise" I disagree they hold all the aces - we hold the key one - we could just walk away and they have nothing especially no cash which is the want they really want. '" Not too sure we'd get away with that one https://www.instituteforgovernment.org. ... vorce-bill

Quote ="Sal Paradise" I disagree they hold all the aces - we hold the key one - we could just walk away and they have nothing especially no cash which is the want they really want. '" Not too sure we'd get away with that one https://www.instituteforgovernment.org. ... vorce-bill

They don't control our future; and I would rather be in the club shaping the rules, than have misanthropic little Englanders like Johnson, Gove and Rees-Mogg given even more control over my future.

Fascinating, you would prefer to be ruled by unelected bureaucrats the likes of Barnier,tusk and that Belgian poppinay.
You never voted for these people and you can’t vote them out. Johnson, Rees-mogg and gove can be voted out, in fact the Labour Party think they can take Johnson’s seat and possibly Amber Rudd’s. That’s the way democracy works ,unlike the European Union.
You say you want to be in the club shaping the rules. Presumably that’s the club that’s swamped this country with cheap Labour.

You would rather have your laws decided for you by the Macron than actually make your own rules. You would rather the French and the Germans decide which court has the ultimate legal say. You would the Germans to dictate on what terms you can do business with the rest of the world.

Above all you are happy that the 10bn a year we contribute to the EU is well spent - because there is no way being inside the EU is going to give you any influence on how the French/Germans decide how to divide up the monies. Only the remainers believe being in the EU give you some say/influence on where the money is spent - its so naive.

The usual rhetoric and jingoism - with [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36473105no facts[/url to back it up.

Brexit has taken on the look and feel of a cultish religion now - there are lots of people who believe in 'taking back control' and 'making our own way,' and believe that we can trade with the rest of the world the day after it happens, without actually understanding most of the detail, or having any genuine sense of what EU laws have impacted on their lives, or how a trade deal works. It requires a significant leap of faith to believe we'll be better of outside the EU - one I'm not prepared to make, because it will negatively impact far too many people when it proves to be untrue.

Have we not just passed a law to bring all current EU legislation on to UK statute? I would suggest that is a fact - who made those laws?

Currently which is the highest court the UK needs to observe - EUC - fact

Who determines how the EU budget is distributed - EU fact

And which EU 'law' (and observe the difference between an EU law and a EU directive) has had a negative impact on your life?

As for the CJEU - it's primary purpose is to ensure that EU regs are properly implemented in member states; so if you think for one second that we'll be able to broker a bespoke trade deal with the EU that doesn't require us to comply with common standards around safety, welfare and consumer protection, you're in Brexit-induced cloud cuckoo land. At best, the very competent Brexit team will have to create a UK based quasi-CJEU to replace it - good luck with that one.

And I would find it bizarre if the EU didn't decide how its own budget was distributed - as a member, and an influential and important one at that, we had a big say in it, and the UK benefited from it; we pay a rebated fee of £280 million a week, and in return, our membership of the SM is worth 4% more in GDP - roughly £1.9 billion a week.

The UK does decide how tax payers money, collected in the UK, is spent and it's right and proper that monies collected by the EU are spent in accordance with the EU's wishes. I think that may be why we have MEP's.

Of course there are bureaucrats, who nobody likes, similar to civil servants in this country, the system would collapse without them.

Can any of the brexiteers on here who want to take their country back from immigrants please tell me what these so called laws are that they talk about? You know, these laws that Macron brought on us?

Regards

King James

Collaborator, spy, Comrade Corbyn will see us right. The man is a liar and a traitor.

We should bring back the death penalty, for a one off show on ITV! we can test it first on bren2k!

The only way that could happen is if the government agreed to a referendum.

But they aren't silly enough to do that, oh wait!

You can't blame a government for excercising democracy, the unfortunate fact is you don't need an IQ to vote!